The Emperor's New 911

[Il Monstro]

Scholars Of Stuttgart, Lend Me Your Ears

I've been debating with myself whether or not to jump into the Porsche Pool.

About two weeks ago I experienced my first mid 80s’ 911 test drive, a Carrera in excellent condition, maintained with dealership service records, 90k, with high performance exhaust and some other Porsche-endorsed enhancements. I've always figured that they possessed an appeal and a driving experience unknown to a peasant like me. Frankly, I can't think of another time I was so completely and totally disillusioned with a car, especially considering I made a serious effort at putting away any preconceived notions or prejudices and wanted to judge it solely on its own merits. I did just that. Afterwards, when my mind would wander back to what these things COST I couldn't even begin to reconcile it; even at a quarter of its price I wouldn't have considered it worthwhile. Frankly, I was at a loss for words. After a second, more aggressive test drive (shifting at much higher RPM's), it was fun at 100 MPH+ when it wasn't scaring the hell out of me with its tendency towards "front lift", especially passing on uphill grades at high speed. I've never driven any car where the front end felt like it lifted up and lost the road like that. Frankly, I cannot for the life of me understand why they're priced so outrageously.

Another friend has an '89 928, that shark-nosed beast is more my style, capable of being driven hard and fast while feeling glued to the road. The prices of the 928's seem far closer to reality as well to me, just in a simple most-Porsche-for-the-money sense. I did not like bolted-in feel of the heavily bolstered seats, though after driving it I saw that it was practical considering the brute power and tight handling. Overall it felt too "twitchy" for me, so hyper-everything that while the driving was fun, the overall experience was EXHAUSTING.

I have now also driven a couple of 944's as well and enjoyed them immensely, more than the 911 or 928. I felt 944 had a superior weight distribution providing precise handling as well as way more power than I'd expected from this "Poorman's Porsche". Styling? I love the rear haunches of the 944 and the long sleek hood; as I said, the 944 is the only Porsche that ever grabbed my eye, before I knew which ones were cheap vs. which were expensive. The 911 always looked to me like a "Gordon Gekko, greed is good" type of car, flashy and status conscious, while the 944 looked like a sleek euro muscle car. Also, to my taste, the styling of the 80's 944 still doesn't look dated; it has a timeless quality. The 911 has a timeless look as well until you get inside; the interior is dated and spare, even cheap looking, my first impression when getting in was "Oh, I remember the Scirroco!". The 944 has a fancier and more roomy interior, excellent ergonomics and of course, the perfect weight distribution. How did Porsche justify a MSRP of $32k base price vs. $22k base price for the 944? In fact, I'm amazed that you can buy such a well-engineered, good looking Euro sportscar like the 944 in great condition for under $5000. I'm very much a Car Guy, I have had more cars at this point than I can literally recall. Overall I prefer the 944 to the 911, so why does one cost (at most) $5k and the other $30k?

While we’re talking Euro cars, I’d like to mention the XJ40 V12 Jaguar from 86-94. Maybe I'm biased but these should sell for at least what the 80's Carreras get. It's a one-of-a-kind car, especially the factory convertibles from 89-93 that had that "timeless" styling and originally cost $55k. The overall build quality, with multiple shock absorbers and suspension providing a 'velvety' ride (I've never felt a ride like that in any other car), the tight and assured handling, the incredibly smooth, powerful and quiet V12, and luxurious yet tasteful interior appointments and materials (real wood and leather, chrome accents, quietly plush and sophisticated) are easily the superior of the $30k 911's. It feels like an "old money" car, no need to blare its exclusivity, as opposed to Rocky's "I went The Distance!" Corvette. The V12 XJS convertible is a car I feel "privileged" to drive.

This brings an interesting thought to mind: I have had several 3000 GT's; two were all stock and one was worked. The stock ones were both a stick and an auto, the worked one (not a VR4) was a stick with a heavy duty clutch as well as some other professionally done mods, it was a lightning bolt. I couldn't believe I was driving a Japanese FWD car, non-turbo with a relatively small V6, That particular 3000 was the most impressive Japanese sports car I had ever driven; stupid fast, nimble, in total control even when pushing it to its limits. Even the stock base models felt more like a true driver's sports car than the 911. The auto trannys even have a OD disable button on the damn shifter (gotta love Japanese design) enabling you to pass with ease even when already doing 80. The "driver's sports car" design of the 3000 is true for handling, acceleration and braking to just the overall, clearly competent sensation of being positioned just right in the cockpit-like driver's seat (naturally with perfect ergonomics, gotta give the Japanese their due) and the car making it clear, "Buckle up, we're gonna have us a GOOD time!" The 3000 GT's, IMO, are a very underrated sports car, especially considering the price; I would take one over a Corvette any day. The Vette might have more brute HP, but the 3000 has that perfectly designed, everything-in-perfect-balance feel that the Vettes NEVER had. Damn, I had my last one (stock, auto tranny) out in blizzards and the thing didn't give me a moment's concern, then once the weather was clear it was back to effortlessly tearing around the parkway like a bat out of hell.

Has anyone driven a late 80's 560SL? It's still got that classic body styling but has more modern technology (electronic FI, etc). The 560SL has the biggest motor of any of the MB roadsters of the 107 body style and the suspension and handling feel like you should be on the Autobahn. It's also got that Jaguar wood and leather interior, understated class and sophistication that gives you that "privileged" feeling. That reaction was precisely what I expected when I got into the 911, I was disappointed to discover it was more like a Scirocco.

In that spirit, I ask you Scholars Of Stuttgart what I am missing as I search for perfect Porsche for me.

[christiandk]

Wow...you lost me after 2nd paragraph. Hope I did not miss out on anything. Did you ever meet PML?

[Il Monstro]

Yeah, that may have been wordy and somewhat verbose.

I just wanted to contrast the three Porsches I mentioned and get some understanding from you guys but my fingers got away from me and the post became Gilgamesh-worthy.

[christiandk]

Originally Posted by Il Monstro

Yeah, that may have been wordy and somewhat verbose.

I just wanted to contrast the three Porsches I mentioned and get some understanding from you guys but my fingers got away from me and the post became Gilgamesh-worthy.

Well, got through the rest of it.

If you dont like a 911 before you sit in it and like it less after you sit in it and drive it, then chances are you will eventually hate it. It is an old design, and I agree that it doesnt drive very well - but I have loved the car since I was 3 years old and always will do, no matter how many quirks they throw me.

As for the Jag and Mitsubushi - never have and never ever will. The MB we can agree on

Cheers,

Christian

[Derkbarrington]

I have driven the 3000GT / Dodge Stealth AWD Turbo and owned the Jaguar. It is very difficult to compare these cars to the Porsche 911- they are so different. The Jag was great when it worked but its quality sucked the same goes with dodge & mitsu. They were fast but the quality of workmanship just sucked. You can't even give away a Jag and Mitsu in my neck of the woods- there was a late 80's XJS V12 and 3000Gt for sale here both for under $3,000. So based on value for the $$ these cars do win out.


The allure of the Porsche 911 is much more than just the driving experience. I don't know why I'm attracted to the body design (even though its dated) and all its quirks but it works for me. It's the car I dreamed of owning when I was a kid.. You can't value it based on performance and aesthetics alone. I guess it is one of those love it or hate it things.... but if you love it you love it a lot.

I find it a little humorous the 911 is being compared to the 3000GT and v12 Jaguar .... in my mind these cars are in a different class all together.

I do love the 944 and 928 as well and have owned (own) both.

[nota]

v12 jag is not a long term car esp if you diys way to complex
and costly to go to a shop

if you like the 560 try the car that replaced it as they are getting cheap now
and have a lot more power in the 500sl replacement

[classicboytoys]

Well it is very easy: if you do not like it, don buy it !

But there is a BUT: apparently the majority of the rest of the world feels it is a much better car then all the rest, as you can see in supply and demand and thus in price: nice Jaguar maybe US 10K, nice Porsche US 30 K and up !

[Il Monstro]

The thought of the 3000GT only came to me in reference to the 944; it was the only car I had previously owned that I could compare it to. It came to mind after driving the 944, leading me to the comparison (and fond memories). It's a stretch to compare the two, the 944 just reminded me of a car I enjoyed (several times over). I hadn't thought about those 3000GT's in awhile, as it had become a case of been there, done that, that's that.

As far comparing the Mercedes SL450's and Jaguar XJS to the Porsche, in my classic Cadillac/Lincoln mindset (I've had more old Lincolns and Cadillacs than I can remember, no exaggeration) they do pace each other on the "motorways". They're all high end, stylish European two seaters with serious pedigrees. I do have a tendency to group European cars together, as I'm mostly a Classic Detroit guy with Japanese daily drivers. I just got my wife an '03 Maxima: that thing is RIDICULOUSLY overpowered!

[NYNick]

I actually found your post interesting and well written. You do however seem to have gone into the analysis a little biased. Do I agree? No, but so what?

The 944 is a great car, as is the 928. It's well documented these cars are more difficult to maintain than our beloved little 911. That being said, I'd buy the best 944 you can get, if I were you; but I'm not.

The other cars you mention, Jag, Mitsubishi, Cadillac/Lincoln and even the dreaded Corvette…well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or, in this case, the seat of our pants. You seem to prefer them. Many, many people do too, just not many here.

How many of the cars you mention are icons? How many of them have won on every racetrack in the world? How many of them are 50 years old? How many of them are the very essence of a marque, not to mention who's sole design was to win races?

You get my point.

A well sorted and set up street worthy 911 will knock your socks off. Perhaps the ones you drove were not so. Stock from the factory 35 year old cars are not the cats ass unless you want them to be. BTW, they all drive differently.

For me, I literally learned how to drive a sports car in a 912/911. I love the old school roominess. It was tricky to handle for sure. I learned some valuable lessons in that car. If I owned it today, I would clearly make some definitive suspension changes. I've also owned a Scirocco. I just don't see how the interior is similar.

Of course, it's a 50 year love affair for me. Hard to sway me away from the old girl at this point. Perhaps your Porsche romance is just beginning? Perhaps not. No one ever said she was the best looking girl in the showroom, but boy, can she dance!

Find one that's been well sorted and worked, as you call it. Then get back to us. Good luck!

Nick

[techweenie]

Such a back-to-back driving analysis is most meaningful when each car is showroom fresh.

After 35+ years, wear, neglect and modifications affect individual examples. If any of the three model types appeal to you in any way (sounds as if they don't) then drive 3-4 examples.

My ex- had a 107, and it's a boat. Comparable in no way to any Porsche.

[Matt Monson]

What Techweenie said. If that Carrera you drove had no front spoiler and lacked a rear tail damn right it can be floaty about 100mph!!! That's why those cars have those parts on them.
Furthermore, we know nothing of the condition (or spec) of the tires, suspension bushings, etc, etc. The car has got to be well tended and sorted to drive the way it did 30 years ago.

Get some right seat time in one with a restored suspension and a boat like a 3000GT isn't even in the same class.
Though based on your post it almost sounds like you are more of a GT car guy than a sportscar guy. Take a look at a 996 Carrera at half the price of the air cooled car and it might speak to you more.
I saw that without judgment. Different strokes for different folks. It doesn't sound like the Carrera spoke to you.

[Il Monstro]

I had to laugh at hearing the 450SL and 3000GT described as a "boat". These bold rides of mine below are what I would consider seafaring vessels. And because I'm a sick, sick boy, these are just three of the fleet of madness; I also have a 1929 Mercedes Gazelle replica with a 1990 Nissan 240SX fuel injected engine (pro install, computer and all) and five speed with a heavy duty clutch, it's SCARY fast. I would actually be interested in track racing that against one of your 911's, I'd just have to take out a hefty life insurance policy first.

"Well, this is not a boat accident! And it wasn't any propeller and it wasn't any coral reef and it wasn't Jack the Ripper! It was a CADILLINCOLN!"







NYNick: I appreciate the feedback, you seem to know your assets from your elbow macaroni. I'm not ruling out a 911, but a 928 or 944 seem like better values and fits for me. As Matt said I'm probably more of a GT car guy than a sportscar guy, I'm def not a "track" guy. Corvette clarification: I have never met a Vette I didn't hate. The Stingrays are nice to look at but not be inside. I used the name Scirroco because it was random and fun to say. Just try saying it w/o laughing; Shi-ROCK-co, the joke makes itself. I meant the interior seemed cheap and dated, like an Audi or Saab from that era. Oh, I know I'm gonna get some heat for that.

[NYNick]

No problem, Monstro. As Matt said, or implied, buy what you love. Sounds like you will anyway, so most of this is guys just chatting.

But listen. Techweenie and Matt are knowledgeable and reputable Porsche guys, not just forum weenies. Find an updated SC or 3.2, and drive it vigorously. While mine is not monster, modern day, twin turbo fast (as is my 2009), it is incredibly well sorted and planted. I promise you will come away very impressed after driving one that is similarly improved.

Don't give up the ship until you've driven one that is done right!

Nick

Oh and BTW, clearly the 944 and 928's are better values. Nobody will argue with you there. They're just different cars.

[mobius911]

Most of the posters here are 911 fans. Porsche made more of them, they've been around longer, and have inspired a rabid following of loyalists. So you'll see most of the responses from those folks.

No question the 944 sounds like a good option for you. Maybe a 944 Turbo, or go for a 968 for that slightly quirkier/less known flavor?

[Nate2046]

Originally Posted by Il Monstro

In that spirit, I ask you Scholars Of Stuttgart what I am missing as I search for perfect Porsche for me.

I don't think you're really missing anything. I commend you for at least going out and driving the cars before forming some silly, internet forum based opinion. I love my 911, every last thing about it, wouldn't trade it for anything, but I understand that its not everybody. I'll happily debate other 911 guys about any sort of minutiae related to our cars but I don't really see the point of trying to convince people of why its a great car.

Looks like you've had/have a lot of cool cars so I wouldn't worry about those that don't 'do it for you.'

[mike gilbert]

All I got to say is how many early 80's cars do you see still on the road and with the original engine.?..not many. The 911's hand built quality is unmatched and even with 200k miles they still feel like new if well maintained, mine does and it surprises me every time I drive it, most cars are a rattling drifty POS after 100k miles. You either get it or you don't and if you don't your not really a car guy IMO. Air cooled 911's are the best mass produced car ever made. There are a lot of beaters out there and you will not understand till you own and drive one that's "right" a few years but the difference is clear a 911 was built to last the life time of the owner...Simplicity at its best.

[Il Monstro]

Originally Posted by pmax

My eyes, my eyes... plz spare us the pics

if I wanna see those, they are plenty on the local cl listings.

The pix did come out rather big, wot wot. I figured this forum had some downsizing feature for photos, but I guess they save it for their cars. Ba-zing

[MrBonus]

I've driven a 3000 GT and VR4 and I can't for the life of me see how anyone could find that to be more of a sports car than a 911. They feel decidedly heavier and the steering is far closer to a Camry than a sports car.

I've owned three Evos, all of which were fantastic in their own right and far more sporting than the 3000s, but despite their more modern chassis and amazing differentials, they are not sports cars.

[ficke]

The main problem when judging a non hyphenated 911 (65-89) Porsche with all other sports cars, is there are no other sports cars like it. How many other rear engined, air cooled sports cars are there?
Now the 944 is an over head cam, water cooled engine in the front with a transaxle in the rear just like many other cars so you can compare them, they have the same layout.
A 70's Lincoln Continental has a big water cooled, pushrod, cast iron V-8 engine in the front with an automatic transmission mated right to it and a live axle in the rear, well so does the cadillac and most all other GM, Ford and Chrysler products of that time, pick up trucks, sports cars, family cars, and they will all drive pretty darn similar to each other because of such similar lay out, there is only so much the engineers can do within those parameters to make a change in the driving feel, I guess spring rate is the main difference. So different body shapes separate them from each other but not driving feel.
This rear engined arrangement used by Porsche for a sports car was chosen by desperate kids trying to raise money to get their dad out of jail, using what they had at hand to work from, their dad's designed economy car for the masses.
Many people who like 911's grew up driving, working on and hot rodding air cooled VW's and the 911 is the VW we always wanted.
A Porsche 911 is the ultimate evolution designed sports car, coming from the humble beginnings of a VW to a world beating super car, all of these or air cooled rear engined cars.
It is such a bad lay out for a sports car that no other company uses it and Porsche tried to replace it (with the 944, 928) but it provides such a unique, throttle steering, handling experience that the buying public demanded it be produced and Porsche did for quite awhile.
So like others said, buy what makes you happy and appeals to your needs and desires, the problem with people who like how a 911 drives is there is no other air cooled rear engined sports cars to chose from and nothing will handle like that since all other sports cars are designed with a different powertrain layout, a 911 is the only option. There is a dwindling supply of what is left, and more people have discovered this unique feel and the prices have soared.
In many ways you should feel lucky it does not appeal to you because now you have more choices to satisfy your driving desires and do not have to buy from this dwindling pool of unique rear engine air cooled cars.

[christiandk]

Very well put, ficke!